def refresh_tileset i=0;len=@regularTileInfo.length;while i<len if @regularTileInfo[i] @regularTileInfo[i].dispose @regularTileInfo[i]=nil end i+=1 end @regularTileInfo.clear @priotiles.clear ysize=@map_data.ysize xsize=@map_data.xsize zsize=@map_data.zsize if xsize>100 || ysize>100 @fullyrefreshed=false else for z in 0...zsize for y in 0...ysize for x in 0...xsize id = @map_data[x, y, z] next if id==0 || !@priorities[id] next if @priorities[id]==0 @priotiles.push([x,y,z,id]) end end end @fullyrefreshed=true endend

Hrmm...not quite in the format to be database'd. Close, but not quite.

Pretty interesting concept there. Actually, for my Advance Wars project, I'm in this dilemma where I need the autotiles to work differently. I'll take this into consideration to look at this and see if I can modify it for my needs.

I did Also, I don't exactly understand what the difference is ... besides the obvious difference in how the auto tile graphic file itself looks.

I believe what this script accomplishes is to allow autotiles to be placed next to each other and still show the auto generated auto edges instead of the center area. Think of it this way, put two single tile wide autotile paths down right next to each other on the same layer, and by default are merged into one. I think what this does is to allow both of those paths to remain as separate paths. That is, if I understood this script correctly.